quantum questions

i have some quick questions for any of you who dabble in quantum mechanics and/or neuroscience.

a) does anyone know of accessible research with significant findings as to the material nature of thought- i.e. what does a 'thought' specifically consist of, beyond the generic notion of chemical processes and electrons, and how possible is it that our brains show quantum activity.

b) has anyone done a conceptual comparison of thought and quantum mechanics as potentially related systems- examined the possibility of similarity between the probability independent states of quantum particles and potentially comparable thought particles/waves/packets etc.

c) if the possibility exists that the physical/temporal nature of pure thought is wholly describable by, or significantly similar to, the established matter/energy structure of quantum mechanics, has anyone considered the implications of such a link.

Not exactly what you're on about ( starting one of those threads aren't you) but Stephan Wolfram has been on about his pattern/ code of the universe for a while now. Always thought the simplicity was interesting.

a) There is a wealth of literature on information processing and memory creation and retreival in prmiitive nervous systems, those of cetain invertebrates. This may not fit your notion of "thought", but the mechanics of the nerve signaling are thought to be the same in higher level species, such as primates. I don't know if there has been an investigation of quantum mechanics with respect to this.

b) No, interesting idea

c) Can pure thought be described as a series of information transactions, and if so could it be described schematically? If this is the case, could a quantum based system be adapted for this purpose,or any system that can process the information?

In the book 'history of philosophy', there is a overview of each great philosopher's theory on the question of 'what is thought.'

One thing many of the theories have in common is the belief that the thinker cannot accurately or objectively determine what they are thinking.

The great question will always remain, just because we think something, does that mean we can know it to be true? If science can find a link between thought and quantum mechanics, is the link there because we thought it, or was the link there before we thought it.

This leaves the question, if we can't think it, does it really exist.

I think therefore I am, or I think therefore I ain't. That is the questions.

i can really count on you to get my mind in gear. thanks !! while not exactly what you seek, i strongly suggest 'simulacra and simulation" by jean baudrillard for the proper framing for your question on thought.